Andman

No wonder. There is an increased thread of copy cats. If I were TLG, I would release infos as late as possible.

So far I haven't experience any serious and unsolvable issues with that scale for that truck. The rear frame was a bit tricky because it starts with a height of 5 studs and ends at 1 studs. But it still had to withstand load and it transfer the forces to the suspension instead of bending. Integrating the driving motors helped in addition to solved not only that problem. What I have experienced in general is, that the bigger you build the more connections you have. Each connection, pin or axle, adds more play to the whole structure. So I basically used an overkill amount of pins to spread applied forces and to minimise play in the structure. Thanks!

Why not? :D But the truth is, I just like big models. That scale also offers ore space to implement features. As for the trailer, I haven't decided yet, if I'm going to build it, too. But before doing that, I have to finish the truck first.

Hey guys, During a chat I was pointed to the Steinwinter Supercargo 2040. I was fascinated by the look and decided to build it. It was designed by the german engineer Manfred Steinwinter. During my research, I found out that he build only one prototype, but planned many more versions. I liked the three-axled version and so started with a rough sketch to get an idea of the proportions: While I was searching for images of that truck, I also contacted the current IP owner and asked for blueprints. Fortunately he liked my project and he send me some. Since then this truck went through many iteration of improvements and design changes. In the end I decided to use Powered Up to control it. This is the current state: These are planned/implemented features and specifications: Current weight: 3kg Length: 86 studs Height: 14 studs Width: 27 studs Power supply: 4x Technic hub Driving: 4x C+ XL motor, each motor is connected to one hub to spread the load (3,528:1, theoretically 0,74 km/h @7,5V @124Ncm) Steering: 1x C+ L motor, two steered axles with Ackerman geometry Compressor: 1x C+ L motor, 4 pumps 3 RC valves: 3x C+ L motor, 3x newest valve one for each the rear axle, front/middle left wheel, front/middle right wheel Angle sensor for suspension on front and middle axle: 2x C+ XL and 2x Boost Medium motors OR 2x C+ XL Angle sensor for rear axle: 1x motor (not implemented yet) Air/pneumatic suspension on all axles controlled by Powered Up double wishbone suspension on fron and middle axle Each front/middle wheel on the left and right side are one unit. That means if the front wheel is pushed up the middle wheel is pushed down. That way the weight is equally distributed on the wheels live rear axle When I decided to use Powered Up I thought about controlling the ride height somehow with Powered Up. To do that I needed something to read the position of the double wish bone arms and the rear axle. Since several motors in the C+/Powered Up eco system can report their position, tried to use them to read the angle of the suspension arm. I successfully implemented that on the front and middle axle. For the rear axle I haven't found a good solution yet, because that axle can move on two axis. While I'm waiting for some additional parts, I'm working on the solution for the rear axle. As for the code, I already made a proof of concept. I created a test setup and wrote some code, which reads the angle of a suspension arm and adjusts it to the desired value. for the finished MOC a can think of something like a parking height, highway ride height and more or less off-road height. Once the chassis is finished the and the Powered Up is working I'll start working on body. Feel free to leave comments, critique and suggestions.

I wouldn't trust the connection between this and this in your rear axle. While it my not be pushed off immediately, IMHO it will be pushed off over time. Did you test that thoroughly? Why didn't you use 3L pins in you rear axles to connect the wheel hubs? Looking forward to see progress!

The vibrations caused by the tracks increases the level of cuteness over 9000! Well done!

I just stumbled upon this great demonstration (best i have seen so far) on why it is so important to have a proper setup of your u-joints and just had to share it:

Title says everything. Does someone know?

Holy... This beauty is packed like hell and looks really good! Great MOC!

I think you should be satisfied. That test was kind of extreme.

Do you see any damage on the inner 12z bevel gears?

I was told in another forum, that the boost linear motor is the easiest one to turn manually. Will post an update once i got my ordered motors.

I chose a coding project in Powered Up. There you can also create custom controls. I did not create a controller project. Yes, I used more than one hub at the same time to control motors and read infos from.

What is their top priority then?

One of my upcoming MOCs is nearly maxing out the 16 Ports. I had no problems connecting and using the hubs. @Gimmick already posted the code block, which enables you to choose the hub and the specific port. The ID can be from 1 to 4. Hub ID 1 is assigned to the first hub in your connection list. Note that you can change the order of the hubs. So the ID is not bound to the first connected hub. The ports are self-explanatory: just choose A, B, C or D. Just in case you don't know it: Have a look at the guide from @kbalage. With regards to the documentation: Please contact TLG and complain about the missing documentation. I did and the more complain the earlier they might publish one. This guide is the only one I got from them... after asking twice.

Great model! I hope you meant "latest" and not "last" MOC ;-)

I know. I was just specifically referring to @Scoar Sonander. @1974 just posted why it wasn't done before and will likely never be done, because for TLG security > performance. Not to speak of stress which is applied to parts and can decrease live expectancy of them.

Why wouldn't it be possibles to hard couple them? As long as they motors have the same specs it's absolutely doable. You even don't need a diff. The differences between same type of motors are so marginal that it doesn't do any serious harm. @Philo tested it some time ago here. It might also be wise not to address people and put them in groups. I don't understand why anyone should be disappointed. Instead focus on arguments. There are valid ones against (security) and for (performance) hard coupling motors.

He said that because another YT channel made assumptions that this set could be canceled too, because it is used in military. In my opinion click bait and hype based on nothing.

Does anyone else other than me have questions about how valid the leaked pictures are? ;-) Jokes aside: Haven't heard anything of that guy before. But he may have contacts/sources. Who knows. The only thing i takes serious are officially released images. The current leaks showing just first concepts, is something which wouldn't surprise me at all.

Thanks for the instructions! Why didn't Rebrickable allow you to publish it?

Hi everyone, I'm searching for the best motor to measure angles. Since I don't have all motors, I'm depended on those, who have them and could a comparison. Requirements: The motor must be compatible with the C+ Technic Hub, used for example in the 42100 The resistance, when turning the motor manually, has to be as low as possible When the motor is turned manually and you stop turning, the motor should not continue to turn with too much swing. 2. has more priority than 3. I have tested the C+ L and XL motor so far. I also have the large angular motor, but it is simply too large. The internal resistance of the C+ L motor was way to high. The C+ XL motor delivered quite ok-ish results. It is just too bulky. Perfect shape and size would be the Medium Angular Motor, which I don't have. Another alternative would be the Boost Medium Linear Motor. I would appreciate, if someone, who has these motors, could do a test for me. A little teaser why I'm looking for this info: I'm building a truck with pneumatic suspension. I using the angles of the suspension arms to detect and control the height. First proof of concept in PoweredUp is already written and working.

Do you have another receiver to test with? My first assumption, based on your description, is that one of the metal contacts on the IR receiver is not in place. I had this issues with two of my receivers. Did you test both ports? You can use a small and thin screwdriver to bend them inwards to the center of the connector. But be careful.

Interesting front suspension!

Maybe this thread helps: https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/175279-operate-sbrick-plus-with-3s-lion-at-126v-max/